Collaborating Authors


The Ethics of AI - KDnuggets


Kevin Gray: AI has become part of our daily lives, hasn't it! Dr. Anna Farzindar: I was working on my laptop when my college daughter said "Mom please don't do anything wrong with AI!" Then two days later during our family dinner, my younger freshman high school daughter told a story about a video on social media showing a small home care robot that tricked the owner and lied. She asked me "Mom, aren't you afraid of robots?" These short conversations made me think about how the new generation is a big consumer of technology but, at the same time, they are concerned and worried about the future AI. KG: Getting back to basics, what is AI? AF: From talking to your virtual assistance on smartphone (like SIRI), watching a recommended movie on Netflix, searching on Google, following the suggested Instagram posts, using the sophisticated methods of an auto trading stock market, applying the decision making systems for your loan approval, or (soon) sitting in a self-driving car, AI algorithms are so embedded in our daily life that is hard to imagine living a single day without them!

The evolution of work--seven new realities


Getting work done is a fundamental concern for any business. But today, paradigm-shifting forces seem to be driving significant changes in both work and the workforce. New digital and communications technologies are changing how work gets done. The growth of the gig economy and advances in artificial intelligence are changing who does the work. Even the question of what work looks like is coming under examination as a continually evolving marketplace drives organizations to explore new business models. In the face of these technological and social forces, it could be imperative for businesses to rethink their approaches to the how, who, and what of work in fundamental, perhaps even transformative ways. And as usual, there seem to be no easy answers.

A new study measures the actual impact of robots on jobs. It's significant.


Machines replacing humans in the workplace has been a perpetual concern since the Industrial Revolution, and an increasing topic of discussion with the rise of automation in the last few decades. But so far hype has outweighed information about how automation -- particularly robots, which do not need humans to operate -- actually affects employment and wages. The recently-published paper "Robots and Jobs: Evidence from U.S. Labor Markets" by MIT professorDaron Acemoglu and Boston University professor Pascual Restrepo, PhD '16, finds that industrial robots do have a negative impact on workers. The researchers found that for every robot added per 1,000 workers in the U.S., wages decline by .42% and the employment-to-population ratio goes down by .2 The impact is more sizable within the areas where robots are deployed: adding one more robot in a commuting zone (geographic areas used for economic analysis) reduces employment by six workers in that area.

GPT-3 Creative Fiction


What if I told a story here, how would that story start?" Thus, the summarization prompt: "My second grader asked me what this passage means: …" When a given prompt isn't working and GPT-3 keeps pivoting into other modes of completion, that may mean that one hasn't constrained it enough by imitating a correct output, and one needs to go further; writing the first few words or sentence of the target output may be necessary.

AI Research Considerations for Human Existential Safety (ARCHES) Artificial Intelligence

Framed in positive terms, this report examines how technical AI research might be steered in a manner that is more attentive to humanity's long-term prospects for survival as a species. In negative terms, we ask what existential risks humanity might face from AI development in the next century, and by what principles contemporary technical research might be directed to address those risks. A key property of hypothetical AI technologies is introduced, called \emph{prepotence}, which is useful for delineating a variety of potential existential risks from artificial intelligence, even as AI paradigms might shift. A set of \auxref{dirtot} contemporary research \directions are then examined for their potential benefit to existential safety. Each research direction is explained with a scenario-driven motivation, and examples of existing work from which to build. The research directions present their own risks and benefits to society that could occur at various scales of impact, and in particular are not guaranteed to benefit existential safety if major developments in them are deployed without adequate forethought and oversight. As such, each direction is accompanied by a consideration of potentially negative side effects.

Closing the employability skills gap


Most organizations are well aware of what economists are calling the Fourth Industrial Revolution1 and what it could mean for the future of work.2 Up to an estimated 47 percent of US jobs face potential automation over the next 20 years, driven primarily by rapid advances in AI, cognitive computing, and automation of repetitive, rule-based tasks.3 Other disruptive forces seem to be shaping the future of work as well--many organizations are shifting to more team-based structures; workplaces are increasingly virtual, flexible, and geographically agnostic; the overall workforce is becoming more diverse, multigenerational, and dispersed; and most careers are morphing from following predictable road maps to constant reinvention. In the face of this, various leaders across industries are reimagining their workforce models to explore how they can use technology, expanded work settings, and alternative talent to address these disruptive forces. In addition, many are reevaluating their talent profiles, including how they measure the skill sets required for success in the future.

Getting practical about the future of work


What story will people tell about your organization over the next ten years? Will they celebrate an enthusiastic innovator that thrived by adapting workforce skills and ways of working to the demands of the new economy? Or will they blame poor financial or operational results, unhappy employees, and community disruption on a short-sighted or delayed talent strategy? Our modeling shows that by 2030, up to 30 to 40 percent of all workers in developed countries may need to move into new occupations or at least upgrade their skill sets significantly. Research further suggests that skilled workers in short supply will become even scarcer. Some major organizations are already out front on this issue.

Artificial Intelligence will Make the Workplace More Human, not Less


New AI systems have beyond-human cognitive abilities, which many of us fear could potentially dehumanize the future of work. However, by automating these skills, AI will push human professionals up the skillset ladder into uniquely human skills such as creativity, social abilities, empathy, and sense-making, which machines cannot automate. As a result, AI will make the workplace more human, not less. This is the gift of AI to Mankind. However, humans will need to change jobs and learn new skills throughout their lives.

The future of work in black America


Economic intersectionality can refer to the compounded effects of any combination of characteristics associated with economic disadvantage. In this article, we focus on differing levels of automation-based challenges for African American men and women of various ages and education levels in rural and urban America. We project that African Americans in the 13 community archetypes we analyzed may have a higher rate of job displacement than workers in other segments of the US population due to rising automation and gaining a smaller share of the net projected job growth between 2017 and 2030. By 2030, the employment outlook for African Americans--particularly men, younger workers (ages 18–35), and those without a college degree--may worsen dramatically. Additionally, we find that African Americans are geographically removed from future job growth centers and more likely to be concentrated in areas of job decline.

The 2018 Survey: AI and the Future of Humans


"Please think forward to the year 2030. Analysts expect that people will become even more dependent on networked artificial intelligence (AI) in complex digital systems. Some say we will continue on the historic arc of augmenting our lives with mostly positive results as we widely implement these networked tools. Some say our increasing dependence on these AI and related systems is likely to lead to widespread difficulties. Our question: By 2030, do you think it is most likely that advancing AI and related technology systems will enhance human capacities and empower them? That is, most of the time, will most people be better off than they are today? Or is it most likely that advancing AI and related technology systems will lessen human autonomy and agency to such an extent that most people will not be better off than the way things are today? Please explain why you chose the answer you did and sketch out a vision of how the human-machine/AI collaboration will function in 2030.